Don't see a problem.

Sounds to me like all the device does is help track down a specific cellphone. Seeing that it is in the hands of a suspect would mean tracking there location can be made easier and more precise. I do not see an issue with tracking/finding suspects and can't see why anyone else would.Hypothetically, what if police asked people if they have seen the suspect and they gave police information that pinpointed the suspects location. I doubt anyone would have an issue with that. You see, this is basically doing just that but using electronics to find the suspect instead of people. I suppose criminals may not like it because it is using their own cell phone against them. Hey, if they don't like it, they can just go without a cell phone.Some people on the "no" side have said that they are being used to eavesdrop on private conversations. So far, I have not found anything to support that claim. That the device can only be used to help track the cell, not listen in. If they can be/ are being used for that, then gaining that information would need a warrant, and any use of that information would be a violation of the suspects constitutional rights.In short, as long as it is being used to track down a suspect, I don't see an issue.

Although the tactic is legal, it is very invasive and should not be used without a warrant

Debating whether or not a measure applied by the police is legal is counterproductive. If it is in the interest of those in power, any tactic such as Stingray can be fitted into a convenient loophole. The question that we should be asking ourselves is whether it is acceptable with regard to the right to privacy, and if it can be of any benefit to society.

You are handling people's persoal information.

I believe that, to a certain level, using the Stingray tatic could be unconstitutional. You cannot just take people's personal information like this. You don't know what you can find. Intercepting cellphone signals and phone calls with no prior authorization? I don't understand how this is legal. On phone calls, information is shared on a personal level with two people and no other in betweeen.

No, the Stingray police device should not be legal because it is unconstitutional.

No, the Stingray police device should not be legal because it is unconstitutional. The device sends out a signal to all cellphones in a given area. It then provides a list of what phones are in that area, including ones that are not being used. Police can then use that information to track people with specific numbers, including their locations and their conversations. This mass spying is not constitutional.

No it is not

The stingray tactic is a secretive-cellphone tracking device. Police in Maryland have recently got into legal trouble for using one without a warrant. This tactic definitely should not be legal. Fair enough, it is a valuable resource for tracking criminals and bad people, but it can easily be abused, and we need to stop living on the edge of fear.